Will big money rule?

Anyone who has turned on a television, opened a mailbox or scrolled through their phone in northeastern Minnesota this fall knows something unusual is happening in the race for state Senate District 3.
Two outside groups aligned with the Republican Party have poured money into this race at a scale this region has never seen before. The Republican-aligned Advance Minnesota has spent $480,000 against DFL Sen. Grant Hauschild, and the national Republican-backed Renew Minnesota has added another $300,000, with still more spent promoting his opponent, Babbitt Mayor Andrea Zupancich. Together the spending against one state senator from northeastern Minnesota is approaching a million dollars, and the election is still nearly a month away.
This outside spending dwarfs that of either campaign, and already represents the most money spent on any state senate campaign in the state. By the time it’s done, it could well be the most expensive state senate campaign in Minnesota history.
Keep in mind, the person who wins will vote on school funding formulas, state road maintenance budgets, and local government aid. These are vital matters to folks here in the North Country. They are not usually matters that draw national money.
So, ask yourself: why do these groups care so much?
The answer is not complicated. The Minnesota Senate is split 34-33, and Hauschild won the open seat by just 703 votes in 2022. To the money men flooding the zone with attack ads, our area means nothing. Many couldn’t even find our region on a map. They know nothing of our economy, our culture, or our hopes for the future. Our district has been chosen for this bombardment not because outsiders care about our future, but because our votes just might give them control of Minnesota’s Legislature— for their own purposes.
That should trouble every voter, regardless of party.
It was not always this way. Campaign finance limits, both at the state and federal levels, used to keep the influence of big money in check. But the U.S. Supreme Court intentionally opened the floodgates to our current reality with its 2010 Citizens United ruling, which found that money equals speech. It was one of the worst in a long list of corrupt decisions by the John Roberts’ court.
It is fair to ask what it says about the health of our political system when those with vast wealth feel entitled to tell an entire region how to vote. A retiree in Embarrass may give $50 to the candidate she believes in. Yet a handful of extremely wealthy individuals, who often don’t even live in Minnesota, can write checks with several more zeroes and flood the region with attack ads against candidates they know nothing about other than party identification. Both the retiree and the big money interests are engaging in “speech,” as defined by the Supreme Court. Yet only one of them is truly heard. And because the money behind the ads is anonymous, there is no accountability when these groups make false claims. A candidate who says something false may face consequences. A group with a patriotic-sounding name and a post office box can say almost anything and vanish the day after the election.
It’s not just happening in the Third District. In the state’s governor’s race, a Wisconsin billionaire named Richard Uihlein, and his wife Elizabeth, have poured an astonishing $14 million into groups backing Republican candidate Lisa Demuth.
To be fair, it hasn’t always been Republicans who have benefitted from this spending. Outside groups and unions also spend heavily in support of Democratic political campaigns in some cases. But the amounts involved have jumped sharply under the Trump administration, particularly on the GOP side, where the money can quickly translate into benefits for the contributors. President Trump has made no secret of the transactional nature of his administration. You put your money in, you get government contracts, pardons, insider information, or whatever else you need, in return. Sadly, that approach to politics trickles down from the top.
That is how Citizens United has distorted what’s left of our democratic system. It has not silenced ordinary citizens— it has drowned them out. It has turned too many candidates into sponsored minions for wealthy benefactors.
Voters in District 3 have the final say, and no amount of money can take that away. When the next glossy mailer arrives, look for the fine print. Ask who paid for it and where they live. Ask what they want in return. Then make up your own mind. Talk to your neighbors, go to a candidate forum and read the candidates’ own words.
The people spending a million dollars to sway this election are betting you won’t ask these questions. Prove them wrong.